There are increasingly convincing indications that Hillary Clinton has made a strategic decision to stonewall on the email and Clinton Foundation controversies in hopes of “running out the clock” and winning the presidency without being forced to address sticky questions on such matters. Most of the talk right now revolves around the impact of this tactic on Clinton’s actual odds of becoming the 45th president. Is stonewalling ever smart? Would engaging with scandalmongers just validate them and help obscure the many things about Donald Trump that dwarf even the worst assumptions about Clinton?

If HRC’s campaign continues to (a) refuse to talk about emails and Foundation financing while (b) maintaining a steady but unspectacular lead in the presidential polls, then another question will surely begin to emerge: Is a too-cautious Clinton sacrificing her party’s prospects of a big landslide election that takes back Congress?